Slate's Bizbox
war stories: Military analysis.

Fort Bragging RightsWho Won the Pentagon's Other War?

By Scott Shuger
Posted Thursday, Dec. 20, 2001, at 10:51 AM ET
Illustration by Robert Neubecker

One question you're not asking yourself today is "Who won the war?" But then again, you don't work at the Pentagon. There that question is a burning one because there it doesn't mean "Which side won?" It means "Which service branch won?" The first time I ever set foot in the place, during the Cold War, I saw in a Navy office a wall sign stating, "Never forget our true enemy: The U.S. Air Force." To a degree that few lifelong civilians appreciate, service rivalry is a huge part of military culture, and at the Pentagon—despite much official yadda yadda about joint operations and teamwork—this is further intensified because the reputation of a service branch directly affects its budget and recruiting.

I was reminded of this mind-set recently when a Pentagon Army person expressed his concern about his service's very restrictive stance about allowing reporters to accompany units in the field: "If this keeps up, the public is going to think the Marines won the war."

So, who did win? I would speed-handicap the services' achievements this way. Huge points to the (mostly Army) special operations soldiers who were able to get into the boondocks and effectively support the Afghan anti-Taliban forces, especially by designating targets for airstrikes. Big points to the Air Force and Navy for executing those airstrikes with unprecedented accuracy. Medium points to the Marines for putting extra pressure on retreating Taliban forces at a crucial moment. Take away a few points from the Air Force for killing several U.S. troops with an errant bomb.

A simple way to gauge the dominance in the public mind is to check brand-name media mentions. When I ran "United States Army" on the New York Times Web site search engine, I got back 37 articles from the past 30 days. For "United States Air Force," it was eight. For "United States Navy," the yield was but five. For "United States Marine Corps," it was three. But when I put in "special operations" I got 73 hits. That tells me that the true winners in the public's mind are probably those Delta Force (Army), Green Beret (Army) and SEAL (Navy) commandos. This marks a real change for these types of soldiers, who are used to operating in the political as well as the actual shadows, one that may pay off big-time when the next defense appropriations bill gets drawn up.

Of course, there's a difference between a service's actual performance and the general consensus about it. And make no mistake—in the Pentagon, it's the latter that really counts.

Print This ArticlePRINTDiscuss this in The FrayDISCUSSEmail to a FriendE-MAIL
Share on FacebookPost to MySpace!Share with MixxDigg ThisShare with RedditShare with del.icio.usShare with FurlShare with Ma.gnolia.comShare with SphereShare with Stumble Upon
Scott Shuger is a Slate senior writer who spent five years in the U.S. Navy and served overseas as an intelligence officer.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES

Notes From The Fray Editor:

Netcheckers explains here why the Internal Revenue Service were the real winners. ("5. They'll get to collect even more taxes from the average American to pay for all this, while letting the really rich and corporations off the hook… 6.They have new legislation that will allow them to go snooping into everyone's private financial information under the guise of 'terrorism'".) TRK likes the fact "that our military branches compete, because it keeps them on their toes," and we like his sudden shift to discussing how much recruitment advertising the armed forces should do. Dude (as always) starts off well: "It is heartbreaking to see that… the freeing of the U.S. Air Force from the tyranny of the U.S.Army following WWII has done nothing to end inter-service rivalry… As long as policy is set by the Joint Chiefs of Staff within the confines of budgetary constraints determined more by the wants of the military-industrial complex than by the realities of need-driven American force projection, there will be bloody throw-downs within the halls of the Pentagon." But his solution, as it is for everything, is to legalize marijuana. We somehow feel this will not be a popular view.

Comments:

I remember the old military saying "Amateurs think in terms of tactics, professionals in terms of logistics." As someone who briefly commanded a Class VII supply company, I can tell you, the U.S. wins because it supports its soldiers better. We can resupply faster, evacuate wounded faster, get replacements in faster, and fix damaged gear faster. Every nation in the world has hard men who will die for a cause. The U.S. knows how to support its warriors so that they often don't have to.

--SDH

(To find or answer this post, click here.)


Don't forget that included in "special operations troops" are Airforce Combat Control and Pararescue. These are the Air Force's special operations groups and are every bit the equal of the Seals, Green Berets and Delta. In fact, some Seals, Berets, etc. will even say (though not publicly) they are the best. They certainly have the toughest training requirements to complete in order to join these two groups.

--Airforceguy

(To find or answer this post, click here.)


The Navy rules and here is why.
Special Forces: Everyone knows that the SEALs rule. Everyone knows this.

Aviation: Not only does the Navy have more planes than any other service (including the Air Force) but they have the best pilots (Naval Aviators).

Troops: Granted, the Army has a lot of soldiers but did you ever wonder why the Marines are the ones setting up the forward bases in Afghanistan? It is a simple equation really: the Navy, having achieved domination of the seas, was frustrated by the Army and Air Force's inability to defeat the enemy on the adjacent pieces of land. Now the Army and Air Force had the right tools, tanks, planes, helicopters, etc. but they were not trained (as sailors are) to fight. The Navy addressed this problem by creating the Marines, equipped them, trained them and most importantly, taught them how to fight. The following pattern evolved from there: 1) The Navy pummels the enemy from sea; 2) when the enemy is sufficiently beaten down, the Navy uses its Marines to finish them off; 3) the Navy's Marines defeat the enemy in detail per the Navy's orders and secure the area; and 4) once it is safe, the Army and Air Force are brought in to occupy the territory the Navy took so the Navy can move on to the next target.

I could go on but it is obvious to anyone that without the Navy, our armed forces would be nothing but a few highflying desk jockeys and a bunch of civilians who happen to drive tanks.

--Ender

(To find or answer this post, click here.)

(12/20)

Washington Post
The Washington Post
OPINIONS
Imagine if...
Hiatt | What if McCain had waged his campaign based on respect?
Editorial: Meddlesome PalinKing: The Danger of Palin Power